Up until the latest couple of versions of the FAQ/Errata, many terrain tiles and obstacles had specific rules for dealing with large monsters (lava / mud / pits, for example). However, according to the most recent FAQ/Errata I could find, there is a new "rule of thumb" for dealing with large monsters: the "front" tiles of a large monster are affected by terrain/obstacles, while the "back" tiles are not.

I want to make sure I understand this new ruling, especially as it pertains to terrain effects which have specific rulings for large monsters indicating that they normally only affect large monsters that step completely into them.

Now that we have a new ruling, which of the following methods is the correct way to determine which terrain tiles take effect on a large monster passing over them? (Again, assuming that we're talking about lava / mud / pits / ice, and other tiles that only affect large monsters who step completely into them).

fex said:

FAQ pg 2
When a large monster moves, it suffers the negative effects only of whatever terrain its “front” half enters

DJitD pg15
...Large monsters are not affected by pits unless they move entirely into one...
Large monsters can only be targeted once by a single attack, even if a Blast or Sweep attack covers multiple spaces occupied by the figure. Likewise, large monsters only take one wound from slime per move, no matter how many spaces containing slime they enter.

I do not believe a 'general' FAQ answer overrides a 'specific' rule, so I still consider that large monsters must be entirely in a pit to 'fall in'.
Other negative terrain effects (such as Lava, mud, ice etc) pretty clearly only take effect when the front half ( which I believe basically means the leading edge/row, since 6 base creatures don't have a useable front half) steps onto that space. From the rule about slime it is clear that even if more than one front/leading space moves into terrain the effect is only felt once for that single space worth of movement (yes, we know slime doesn't exist and hasn't since pre-production, but substitute mud/lava/ice etc for slime and you get the rule nice and clear).

So for pits for method 1 would be correct - pits have a specific rule which IMO trumps the general rule.
For other negative terrain your method 3 would be correct.

Note that beneficial terrain counts if any part of the base (even the back) is on the terrain.

Who told you the part about the 6-space monsters, Corbon?

I guess you meant method 2 for other negative terrain?! Monster B in method 3 still suffers a wound, even though it stepped on the terrain only with one of its spaces.

In general my group follows method 2, unless the terrain specifically says all the monsters squares need to be in the terrain to effect it, then they're method 1 . Pits and Ice are the only ones I can think of (at work) that require complete immersion.

I'm a little more curious about the movement cost increasers... one encounter (swamp something or other) increases the MP cost to enter the squares next to the water. If the front two (or three) squares of a large creature both enter squares adjacent to water do you have to pay the increase twice? (I guess that would be your method #4)

edit: clarification (maybe)

You may notice that the FAQ ruling in question claims that it is a fix for the fact that large monsters can be damaged twice as much as small monsters moving over the same hazardous terrain, and then proceeds to list as some examples terrain that large figures previously suffered less than small figures. Whoever wrote that particular ruling clearly doesn't understand the rules he was attempting to change and it is my strong recommendation that it be totally ignored. The preassumptions of the explanation contradict the rules; as Corbon points out, the ruling itself contradicts other rulings in the same FAQ; and the ruling is also contradicted by the ToI rules for the Ice obstacle, which were printed after that FAQ ruling was created and therefore should have been adjusted for them.

Even if you wanted to use it, as should be clear by now, the ruling itself is hopelessly muddled, using vague wording and undefined terms, and there are many things it could mean. You haven't even asked about what happens when the figure moves diagonally around obstacles! Some vaguely plausible guesses could perhaps be made about what the intent might have been, but since the "big picture" intent was "change the rules without having a clue what they were to begin with," authorial intent does not matter because the entire endeavor was crap from the word "go."

I agree that Method 3 seems the right case for lava/mud and similar things (not pits, since they need to fit entirely in the pit to fall in), but would it work differently for water? Because that would make large monsters nearly immobile on some outdoor encounter areas, if they can't move in if they touch it at all. We've been playing that the entire front needs to enter water to be prohibited from entering, and it needs to end movement completely out of water.

I think the key here is that the text states "the front half " of the monster. I believe that this quite clearly implies the entire front half of the monster must enter a type of terrain in order to take the effect of the terrain (for applicable terrain types). This seems only reasonable; as Hammerdal and Antistone mention, if a monster could be affected if just part of the front half of the monster entered the terrain, they would actually take more damage and be affected more adversely then small monsters, which seems counter-intuitive. As Corbon states, this can be presumed to mean the front two spaces for 3x2 monsters.

I suppose that would be your Method #2, Fex.

Here's the way I understand it...

Method #1 is applicable only for pits (and ice?)

Method #2 is applicable for lava, water, mud, "swamp" type spaces, etc. (and ice?)

Method #3 seem entirely innaplicable to me, but I may be wrong. As far as I can interpret, a monster must either be entirely on hazardous terrain, or have it's entire front half on hazardous terrain, to take adverse effects. One space of a large monster, whichever space it is, does not strike me as being affectable.

Method #4 is applicable only for terrain that is beneficial (trees, etc.)

Exin Ferris said:

Except that the FAQ entry says:

A figure receives the benefits of a terrain feature if any part of its base is on that terrain feature. For example, if half of a spider’s base is on a table, the spider is considered to be elevated.

So unless any part of its base actually means "half", if even one square of a 2x2 creature is on a table it gets a bonus, or a penalty from an obstacle. Same reason why large monsters in outdoor encounters frequently get stuck on the 2 square wide "corridors" because of water spaces.

Hammerdal said:

Large monsters have always been prohibited from making any move that overlaps a rubble or water obstacle, even if the overlap is only one square. Large monsters occupy all the spaces they fill, and rubble and water both block movement.

Any rules-based argument that would allow large monsters to overlap water would also allow them to overlap walls, because no special allowance is made for water.

Exin Ferris said:

Actually, while the ruling is quite vague and there are many things that it could plausibly mean, that is not one of them.

"For example, if a spider were to move from four clear squares to a mud square, it would suffer a movement penalty."

That explicitly says that the penalty is suffered even if there is only one mud square.

However, let me reiterate that I in no way endorse following the FAQ's ruling on this subject, as it is broken six ways from Sunday.

Big Remy said:

You appear to have overlooked the fact that the FAQ ruling in question explicitly uses different guidelines for positive and negative effects. Re-read the first sentence of that paragraph.

Antistone said:

Sorry, I'm going to be stupid here and ask you to quote the difference because I really am not seeing it.

I'm pretty much with Antistone on this one.

This "special ruling" seems to have been written as an attempt to simplify issues dealing specifically with the negative effects of Scything Blades, Dart Fields, etc., and the positive effects of Sarcophagi, Tables, Beds, etc., but has made the rulings on other terrain effects much more confusing, since it directly contradicts with:

• The previous rulings (Mud, Lava, Pits)
• Rulings that were printed after it (Ice)
• Other rulings from the exact same FAQ/Errata (Pits, page 7 of the FAQ 1.3)

I think that the right way to deal with this "special ruling" is to ignore it whenever a specific ruling is listed for a type of terrain. With that being the case, I believe, based on my understanding of the rulebooks, that the following methods should be used for each terrain type:

• Pits: Method 1 - The monster is only affected if the entire figure is engulfed by Pit tiles. Original rulebook, page 16.
• Rubble: Method 4 - The monster is immediately affected by a single Rubble tile (thus making some areas of dungeons inaccessible to some large monsters). Original rulebook, page 17.
• Water: Method 4 - The monster is immediately affected by a single Water tile (thus making many areas of outdoor encounters inaccessible to some large monsters). Original rulebook, page 17.
• Lava: Method 1 - The monster is only affected if the entire figure is engulfed by Lava tiles. Well of Darkness rulebook, page 4.
• Mud: Method 1 - The monster is only affected if the entire figure is engulfed by Mud tiles. Well of Darkness rulebook, page 4.
• Scything Blades: Method 3 - The monster is affected once if any of the figure's leading tiles come in contact with a Scything Blade tile. A monster can only be affected once per "step" it takes, and will not be affected on its final step out of the Scything Blade tiles, as the front half leaves the Scything Blades and its back half moves to catch up. Well of Darkness rulebook, page 4 + Special Ruling.
• Dart Fields: Method 3 - The monster is affected once if any of the figure's leading tiles come in contract with a Dart Field tile. A monster can only be affected once per "step" it takes, and will not be affected on its final step out of the Dart Field tiles, as the front half leaves the Dart Field and its back half moves to catch up. Well of Darkness rulebook, page 4 + Special Ruling.
• Fog: When calculating line of sight for a large monster partially engulfed by Fog, treat each tile of the figure depending on whether or not that tile is engulfed by Fog. For instance, if the front half of of a Bane Spider is engulfed by fog, the Bane Spider may either trace line of sight from one of the front tiles into an adjacent space, or from one of the back tiles following normal line of sight rules. Altar of Despair rulebook, page 7 + my interpretation.
• Corrupted: Not applicable.
• Altars and Evil Altar s: Method 3 - The monster is "on top" of an Altar or Evil Altar if any of a figure's tiles are on top of an Altar or Evil Altar tile. Altar of Despair rulebook, page 7 + Special Ruling.
• Beds and Tables: Method 3 - The monster is "on top" of a Bed or Table if any of a figure's tiles are on top of a Bed or Table tile. Road to Legend rulebook, page 26 + Special Ruling.
• Bone Heap: Method 3 - The monster is affected once if any of the figure's leading tiles come in contact with a Bone Heap tile. A monster can only be affected once per "step" it takes, and will nto be affected on its final step off of the Bone Heap tile(s), as the front half leaves the Bone Heap and its back half moves to catch up. Road to Legend rulebook, page 26 + Special Ruling.
• Fountains: Method 3 - The monster is affected by a Fountain if any of a figure's tiles are on top of a Fountain tile. Road to Legend rulebook, page 26.
• Giant Mushrooms: Method 3 - The monster is affected by a Giant Mushroom if any of a figure's tiles are on top of of Giant Mushroom tile. Road to Legend rulebook, page 27.
• Sarcophagus and Frozen Sarcophagus: Method 3 - The monster suffers a movement penalty if any of the figure's leading tiles come in contact with a Sarcophagus tile. A monster can only be affected once per "step" it takes, and will not be affected on its final step out of the Sarcophagus tiles, as the front half leaves the Sarcophagus and its back half moves to catch up. Meanwhile, the monster gains the Elevated bonus if any of the figure's tiles is in contact with a Sarcophagus tile. Road to Legend rulebook, page 27 + Special Ruling.
• Throne: Method 3 - The monster suffers a movement penalty if any of the figure's leading tiles come in contact with a Throne tile. A monster can only be affected once per "step" it takes, and will not be affected on its final step out of the Throne tiles, as the front half leaves the Trone and its back half moves to catch up. Meanwhile, the monster gains the Elevated bonus if any of the figure's tiles is in contact with a Throne tile. Road to Legend rulebook, page 27 + Special Ruling.
• Tree: Method 3 - The monster suffers a movement penalty if any of the figure's leading tiles come in contact with a Tree tile. A monster can only be affected once per "step" it takes, and will not be affected on its final step out of the Tree tiles, as the front half leaves the Tree and its back half moves to catch up. Meanwhile, the monster gains the Shadowcloak bonus if any of the figure's tiles is in contact with a Tree tile. Road to Legend rulebook, page 27 + Special Ruling.
• Villager: Method 4 - The monster is immediately affected by a single Villager tile (thus allowing Villagers to effectively block off 2-tile walkways). Road to Legend rulebook, page 27.
• Ice: Method 1 - The monster is only affected if the entire figure is engulfed by Ice tiles. Tomb of Ice rulebook , page 6.
• Monster Egg : Method 4 - The monster is immediately affected by a single Monster Egg tile. Tomb of Ice, page 6
• Aura: Method 3 - The monster is affected once if any of the figure's leading tiles come in contact with a tile in an enemy's aura range. A monster can only be affected once per "step" it takes, and will not be affected on its final step out of the aura, as the front half leaves the aura and its back half moves to catch up. Original rulebook, page 22 + Special Ruling.

Aaaanyway, I'm still curious to see how they go about dealing with this ruling, which is structurally unsound, at best.

Big Remy said:

"When a large monster moves, it suffers the negative effects only of whatever terrain its “front” half enters."

"A figure receives the benefits of a terrain feature if any part of its base is on that terrain feature."

This is, naturally, a stupid rule, because effects are not formally divided into "positive" and "negative," and while this doesn't necessarily create any ambiguity for any existing terrain effects (you could maybe argue pits vs. boulders and fog, but that's stretching), it's definitely a trap for future expansions. If they have to make a distinction, it should probably be based on effects for entering versus effects for being in terrain; thus, losing LOS for being in a pit wouldn't be dependent on how you entered the pit.

But whoever wrote "front half" is not by any stretch of the imagination qualified to write rules. Come on, diagonal movement? 2x3 figures? Knockback ? Spawning? What were they thinking?

Antistone said:

Oh I fully agree with the last part of your statements but what about this:

"When a large monster moves, it suffers the negative effects only of whatever terrain its “front” half enters. For example, if a spider were to move from four clear squares to a mud square , it would suffer a movement penalty. "

So moving from four clear square to a mud square (singular form here, so one square) it suffers a penalty. So its the same as the beneficial terrain isn't it? Or do we have to assume to example is wrong and that they meant for there to be different rules concerning benefits versus penalties?

And next time we get offered a FAQ, there needs to be serious player based push to either have that FAQ entry completely removed or at least rewritten and approved by the community.

Big Remy said:

I don't see any inconsistency between the statement and the example. The difference is that if the spider is already on a single mud square, and moves so that it still occupies the same mud square and two new clear squares , then it doesn't suffer the penalty for that movement, even though it still overlaps the mud. Because the overlap is now only in its "rear" half. (Example chosen to make the least assumptions possible about WTH "front" and "rear" are supposed to mean.)

Or, to use a more poignant example, there's a 1-space pit in a corridor that the spider is moving down. When it first moves so that it overlaps the pit, it takes damage, and loses LOS to all non-adjacent spaces for as long as it remains there. But when it moves 1 space forward (so it still overlaps the pit, but entered two clear spaces), then it's LOS is clear again. And presumably it pays an extra MP to climb out of the pit. Which means you can't tell whether the spider is currently in the pit just by looking at it, you have to know how it moved into its current position.

However, with a beneficial effect, front/rear doesn't matter; it gets the benefit no matter what part of the figure overlaps the terrain.

Okay, I think I just misunderstood part of what you were trying to say I guess.

God they need to delete/rewrite that entry.

Parathion said:

Hey, I was careful not to restart that debate!
Leading edge could, under one interpretation of the movement rules (there - referencing, but not restarting, that debate), be the 'side' 3 spaces of a sidestepping 6 space monster. It could also be 4 spaces (in an L shape) of a 6 space monster moving inclined. Those 3-4 spaces are the spaces/edge 'leading' the movement.

And no, I definitely meant method 3. Method 2 has monster B not suffering a wound (assuming Lava is the space, causing a wound) when it definitely should.
As Antistone has pointed out, method 2 is quite clearly not a possible method by the FAQ.

fex said:

+2 to the list above.

Can we just copy and paste that into the FAQ? This is precisely why I think there needs to be a community monitored living FAQ hosted by FFG.

I agree that a detailed listing like this would be useful in the FAQ. I plan to go by this in the interim.

Follow up question: If monster C in the Method 3 diagram is a dragon would it be hit once or twice?

Callistan said:

This is not changed by the FAQ. Altyhough Slime does not exist, you may substitute any other terrain type in it's place (changing wounds to extra MP or whatever is appropriate).

Corbon said:

I agree with all of them except villagers: they're not terrain. Villagers are figures, and thus follow figure rules for monster movement. Not that it matters a whole lot.

True that. I included it simply because it's listed with all the other terrain/obstacles in the RtL compendium, but for all intents and purposes, they should be treated like player-controlled figures.

It may also be worth mentioning that, for whatever it's worth, I stalked down Kevin Wilson on the BGG forums and PM'd him the list for verification, with a link to this thread. Odds are 1:1000 that he even reads it, but I figured it was worth a shot.